Posted by Joshua on Sunday, October 14th, 2007

WASHINGTON, Oct. 13 — Israel’s air attack on Syria last month was directed against a site that Israeli and American intelligence analysts judged was a partly constructed nuclear reactor, apparently modeled on one North Korea has used to create its stockpile of nuclear weapons fuel, according to American and foreign officials with access to the intelligence reports.

The description of the target addresses one of the central mysteries surrounding the Sept. 6 attack, and suggests that Israel carried out the raid to demonstrate its determination to snuff out even a nascent nuclear project in a neighboring state. The Bush administration was divided at the time about the wisdom of Israel’s strike, American officials said, and some senior policy makers still regard the attack as premature.

The attack on the reactor project has echoes of an Israeli raid more than a quarter century ago, in 1981, when Israel destroyed the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq shortly before it was to have begun operating. That attack was officially condemned by the Reagan administration, though Israelis consider it among their military’s finest moments. In the weeks before the Iraq war, Bush administration officials said they believed that the attack set back Iraq’s nuclear ambitions by many years.

By contrast, the facility that the Israelis struck in Syria appears to have been much further from completion, the American and foreign officials said. They said it would have been years before the Syrians could have used the reactor to produce the spent nuclear fuel that could, through a series of additional steps, be reprocessed into bomb-grade plutonium.

Many details remain unclear, most notably how much progress the Syrians had made in construction before the Israelis struck, the role of any assistance provided by North Korea, and whether the Syrians could make a plausible case that the reactor was intended to produce electricity. In Washington and Israel, information about the raid has been wrapped in extraordinary secrecy and restricted to just a handful of officials, while the Israeli press has been prohibited from publishing information about the attack.

The New York Times reported this week that a debate had begun within the Bush administration about whether the information secretly cited by Israel to justify its attack should be interpreted by the United States as reason to toughen its approach to Syria and North Korea. In later interviews, officials made clear that the disagreements within the administration began this summer, as a debate about whether an Israeli attack on the incomplete reactor was warranted then.

The officials did not say that the administration had ultimately opposed the Israeli strike, but that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates were particularly concerned about the ramifications of a pre-emptive strike in the absence of an urgent threat.

“There wasn’t a lot of debate about the evidence,” said one American official familiar with the intense discussions over the summer between Washington and the government of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel. “There was a lot of debate about how to respond to it.”

Even though it has signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, Syria would not have been obligated to declare the existence of a reactor during the early phases of construction. It would have also had the legal right to complete construction of the reactor, as long as its purpose was to generate electricity.

In his only public comment on the raid, Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad, acknowledged this month that Israeli jets dropped bombs on a building that he said was “related to the military” but which he insisted was “not used.”

A senior Israeli official, while declining to speak about the specific nature of the target, said the strike was intended to “re-establish the credibility of our deterrent power,” signaling that Israel meant to send a message to the Syrians that even the potential for a nuclear weapons program would not be permitted. But several American officials said the strike may also have been intended by Israel as a signal to Iran and its nuclear aspirations. Neither Iran nor any Arab government except for Syria has criticized the Israeli raid, suggesting that Israel is not the only country that would be disturbed by a nuclear Syria. North Korea did issue a protest.

The target of the Israeli raid and the American debate about the Syrian project were described by government officials and nongovernment experts interviewed in recent weeks in the United States and the Middle East. All insisted on anonymity because of rules that prohibit discussing classified information. The officials who described the target of the attack included some on each side of the debate about whether a partly constructed Syrian nuclear reactor should be seen as an urgent concern, as well as some who described themselves as neutral on the question.

The White House press secretary, Dana Perino, said Saturday that the administration would have no comment on the intelligence issues surrounding the Israeli strike. Israel has also refused to comment.

Nuclear reactors can be used for both peaceful and non-peaceful purposes. A reactor’s spent fuel can be reprocessed to extract plutonium, one of two paths to building a nuclear weapon. The other path — enriching uranium in centrifuges — is the method that Iran is accused of pursuing with an intent to build a weapon of its own.

Syria is known to have only one nuclear reactor, a small one built for research purposes. But in the past decade, Syria has several times sought unsuccessfully to buy one, first from Argentina, then from Russia. On those occasions, Israel reacted strongly but did not threaten military action. Earlier this year, Mr. Assad spoke publicly in general terms about Syria’s desire to develop nuclear power, but his government did not announce a plan to build a new reactor.

The Gulf Cooperation Council, a group of Persian Gulf states, has also called for an expansion of nuclear power in the Middle East for energy purposes, but many experts have interpreted that statement as a response to Iran’s nuclear program. They have warned that the region may be poised for a wave of proliferation. Israel is believed to be the only nuclear-armed nation in the region.

The partly constructed Syrian reactor was detected earlier this year by satellite photographs, according to American officials. They suggested that the facility had been brought to American attention by the Israelis, but would not discuss why American spy agencies seemed to have missed the early phases of construction.

North Korea has long provided assistance to Syria on a ballistic missile program, but any assistance toward the construction of the reactor would have been the first clear evidence of ties between the two countries on a nuclear program. North Korea has successfully used its five-megawatt reactor at the Yongbyon nuclear complex to reprocess nuclear fuel into bomb-grade material, a model that some American and Israeli officials believe Syria may have been trying to replicate.

The North conducted a partly successful test of a nuclear device a year ago, prompting renewed fears that the desperately poor country might seek to sell its nuclear technology. President Bush issued a specific warning to the North on Oct. 9, 2006, just hours after the test, noting that it was “leading proliferator of missile technology, including transfers to Iran and Syria.” He went on to warn that “the transfer of nuclear weapons or material by North Korea to states or non-state entities would be considered a grave threat to the United States, and we would hold North Korea fully accountable.”

While Bush administration officials have made clear in recent weeks that the target of the Israeli raid was linked to North Korea in some way, Mr. Bush has not repeated his warning since the attack. In fact, the administration has said very little about the country’s suspected role in the Syria case, apparently for fear of upending negotiations now under way in which North Korea has pledged to begin disabling its nuclear facilities.

While the partly constructed Syrian reactor appears to be based on North Korea’s design, the American and foreign officials would not say whether they believed the North Koreans sold or gave the plans to the Syrians, or whether the North’s own experts were there at the time of the attack. It is possible, some officials said, that the transfer of the technology occurred several years ago.

According to two senior administration officials, the subject was raised when the United States, North Korea and four other nations met in Beijing earlier this month.

Behind closed doors, however, Vice President Dick Cheney and other hawkish members of the administration have made the case that the same intelligence that prompted Israel to attack should lead the United States to reconsider delicate negotiations with North Korea over ending its nuclear program, as well as America’s diplomatic strategy toward Syria, which has been invited to join Middle East peace talks in Annapolis, Md., next month.

Mr. Cheney in particular, officials say, has also cited the indications that North Korea aided Syria to question the Bush administration’s agreement to supply the North with large amounts of fuel oil. During Mr. Bush’s first term, Mr. Cheney was among the advocates of a strategy to squeeze the North Korean government in hopes that it would collapse, and the administration cut off oil shipments set up under an agreement between North Korea and the Clinton administration, saying the North had cheated on that accord.

The new shipments, agreed to last February, are linked to North Korea’s carrying through on its pledge to disable its nuclear facilities by the end of the year. Nonetheless, Mr. Bush has approved going ahead with that agreement, even after he was aware of the Syrian program.

Nuclear experts say that North Korea’s main reactor, while small by international standards, is big enough to produce roughly one bomb’s worth of plutonium a year.

In an interview, Dr. Siegfried S. Hecker of Stanford University, a former director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, said building a reactor based on North Korea’s design might take from three to six years.

Reporting was contributed by William J. Broad in New York, Helene Cooper in Washington and Steven Erlanger in Jerusalem.

DAMASCUS (Reuters) – French archaeologists have discovered an 11,000-year-old wall painting underground in northern Syria which they believe is the oldest in the world.

The 2 square-meter painting, in red, black and white, was found at the Neolithic settlement of Djade al-Mughara on the Euphrates, northeast of the city of Aleppo, team leader Eric Coqueugniot told Reuters.

"It looks like a modernist painting. Some of those who saw it have likened it to work by (Paul) Klee. Through carbon dating we established it is from around 9,000 B.C.," Coqueugniot said.

Comments (63)

Interesting – I always thought “SY” was “Syrian Yahood”. It’s always interesting to read about this community, although this treatment was a bit superficial.

Incidentally, the late Faris Bouhafa once told me that Bob Dylan’s mother had Syrian Jewish origins as well. Dylan told Playboy magazine in 1978 how much he liked Oum Kalthoum – the interviewer was like, “Who is that?”

This is from the infaous unintelligence Israeli Debka File websit. If it has a shred of truth to it, then the US is now trying to “threaten” Israel with some pressure ahead of the Annapolis desperate widows meeting and to threaten certain Lebanese of something ( it looks like Harriri visit was not a HUGE success):

DEBKAfile Exclusive: In advance of Rice’s Middle East visits Sunday,

Washington warns Olmert that its dialogue with Damascus is about to resume

October 13, 2007, 9:05 AM (GMT+02:00)

Good news for Bashar Assad from Washington

Our Washington and Middle East sources report the secret US message warns Israeli prime minister that the Bush administration has decided to go back to direct diplomacy with Syria during or before the international peace conference opening in Annapolis on Nov.26. The level of the resumed talks has not yet been determined; the US ambassador may be sent back to Damascus to lead his country’s delegation in face-to-face meetings with Syrian officials, repeating the pattern and level the US-Iranian ambassadorial talks in Baghdad (which, DEBKAfile notes, have so far produced nothing).

To calm Israel’s unease about a US-Syrian track running over its head, the American message assured prime minister Ehud Olmert that matters of concern to Israel, such as the future of Golan, will not be addressed, only such issues as Iran, Iraq and Lebanon.

The American Note was delivered as Secretary of State Condoleezza prepares to visit Jerusalem and Ramallah Sunday, Oct. 12, and Israel’s defense minister Ehud Barak is due to pay a working visit to the Pentagon.

Even so, the White House’s change of heart on Syria puts the US-Israeli strategic cooperation on a different, uncertain footing, say DEBKAfile’s political sources.

Officials in Jerusalem are getting worried about Israel being seriously outnumbered and outweighed to the point of isolation at the peace conference. They find it hard to tell whether the Bush is using the dialogue offer as bait to tempt Assad to attend the Annapolis conference, and so prod the Saudis and Egyptians to come too, or has greater significance. In any event, an ongoing US-Syrian dialogue would give the substantial Muslim-Arab bloc invited to the conference an extra boost. Twelve Arab League members as well as Malaysia, Indonesia and Pakistan have been invited, although not all have responded so far.

The Syrian president’s last-minute decision to be there after his insistent denials could introduce a further element of friction to the conference.

While Assad might not go so far as to pack the Syrian delegation with heads of Palestinian groups branded terrorists by the US, such as Hamas and Jihad Islami, who he harbors in Damascus, he is quite capable of sending over Palestinian enemies of Mahmoud Abbas and Salam Fayyad, such as the radical Fatah-Intifada and the Palestinian “Fronts.”

Beirut is getting as jumpy as Jerusalem about the Bush administration’s advance moves for the conference in Maryland, according to DEBKAfile’s Middle East sources.

Saad Hariri, leader of the anti-American March 14 majority coalition in the Lebanese parliament, returned from his Oct. 4 talks at the White House deeply disappointed. President George W. Bush told him that, while the US was committed to building up the Lebanese army as a shield for the pro-Western government in Beirut, he would not back the anti-Syrian army chief Gen. Michel Suleiman’s run for the presidency. The president urged Lebanon’s anti-Syrian leaders to carry on working for a political compromise of the national crisis through deals with Syria and Hizballah.

Hariri was not told of the US president’s decision to launch direct talks with Damascus before he left for home.

Even Hizballah’s leaders are worried; they fear Washington-Damascus talks will end in a Syrian sellout at their expense

Israel is against any competitive industrial development in their moslem neighbors.

I guess that with the syrian oil fields depleted in 10 years, there is an urgency of developing alternate sources of energy. Israel would not allow any industrial development in neighboring arab/moslem countries to proceed. They have destroyed all the industrial bases of Lebanon left after the civil war, they are now trying to do the same in Syria. Israel wants both military and industrial supremacy. This is why Iran is a thorn in their thigh and Iran’s investements in pushing Syria into nuclear energy and important industrial development, such as car manufacturing or weapons manufacturing is a threat to Israel’s ambitions. They’ll do all they can to hamper such development so they continue their claim that the arab world is “backward”.

It’s interesting how the story is now being slowly walked further and further back from the earliest “scary” iterations. The subtext of the article is still the attempts by some factions in Washington to spike the agreement with North Korea and shape perceptions – and policy – around the alleged nexus of rogue states and WMD’s.

What exactly is a “partially constructed nuclear reactor” supposed to look like – a fucking enormous building site is what, with a lot of plant, materiel and workers chucked in; and destroying such a facility is going to require a fair amount of ordnance and is going to be very noticeable.

Frankly, it wouldn’t surprise me if the “conclusion” that Syria was embarking on the construction of a nuclear reactor was based on satellite imagery of some suspicious-looking portakabins.

It would have been nice if the NYT told us where they think that the nuclear reactor construction site actually was supposed to be – without any “testable” element to what is a very “concrete” story it’s really just vapour.

Dearest Josh, are you running out of articles about Syrian “things” that you keep coming back to this Dair Al Zour story, or do you know something that you can not tell us (kidding)????

Or do you really “suspect” that Syria will be “hit” soon so you want us to keep focused on such a possibility?

In my opinion, rest assured, nothing of the sort is going to happen. Moreover, I have a strange suspicion that Pelosi allowed that long pending Turkey/Armenia bill to pass in order to “limit” the chances of Bush and the neo-cons Rushing into anything rash against either Iran or Syria because the approval and support of Turkey, politically and logistically, would be needed in the case someone wants to attack Syria or Iran, so she pre-empted any such move by ANGERING Turkey so its approval and support for such a US initiated action would not be forthcoming from an ANGRY Turkey.

I really think that woman is very smart and hardheaded! And so are many US Generals who would not put up with any more misadventures by Bush and his neo-cons, or by those neo-cons and their Bush.

WOW…. and BTW, why is no one giving those explosive articles any attention? Is the MSM Arab media that tightly controlled or is Al Akhbar a totally undependaple newspape? But readers here give even the dumb Al Syassah news paper some exposure each time it blurts out something no matter how rediculous it is. Don’t we?

This Re the Harriri Assasination and the “existance” of an Abu Adas (the vedo tape personality) from the Lebanese Al Akhbar Newspaper.

Let’s follow the spiel of the Syrian aplogists on this forum as to not get confused. Look how they have had to change their story as more info emerges:
1) Israel did not bomb anything at all. The planes were spotted and ran away.
2) Israel at most bombed Hizballah weapons. Nobody serious can believe that Syria has a reactor.
3) Israel bombed a nuclear reactor but a legal one

Pathetic. At least the slow trickle of information has allowed you to make fools of yourselves.

Now, Israel has bombed a Syrian nuclear reactor and Syria and Iran have done… nothing. It is a good sign for things to come.

Regardless of what your delusions may tell you, but where have you seen the so-called “Syrian Apologists” make the claims you are listing. The consistent argument was that Israel did not hit anything important, period. In any case maybe you should continue hallucinating and fanticizing about Israel attacking Syria and bringing down the regime if it makes you feel better.

Ghassan,

The Syrians did invite reporters to the site. It was addressed in a New York Times article.

Quoting Professor Josh and his side-kick Alex this whole episode was termed “fishy” and “the story is false”.

Tell us more about “denial” Alex;)

Comment by JL: This sounds a lot more likely than earlier reports, but still fishy because it has too much intelligence, with no indication of where it came from.

Addendum: Here is why Alex skeptical:

It sounded more likely … until they started to talk about Mashal and Nasrallah refusing to hit Israel … that destroys the credibility of the story, or at least its source, since the second half of the story is nonsense.

Syria will not ask Hizbollah to hit Israel before the Lebanese elections … and probably not even after the elections. Last year Nasrallah had to explain his decision to attack the Israeli soldiers that led to Israel’s war on Lebanon. He said that he would not have done it had he known that Israel would react that way.

Hizbollah’s legitimacy in Lebanon is much more valuable to Syria than sending a few useless missiles over Israel.

Also … when those military police members (20? 50?) died in this big operation … how come no one heard of the news in Syria? … their parents? their friends? … no one got the news?

I am very happy with the good statue that the Syrian Jewish community has in the US , It is making more and more clear that Judaism is not a religion only but it is the tribe of the Hebrews who have as much right to be in the middleast as the the other Arabs , the problem is the intruders to the Hebrew tribes like the Russians and the other intruders .Israel should follow the Syrian Jewish tradition of not accepting opportunists.
It is time for president Assad to invite them back to help build Syria ,Their caring for each other gives an example for other Syrians and a road map to succed.
AP , I hope you are one of them which makes an essential part of this forum.

It was refreshing to read a article concerning “Arab Jews”, and it reinforced my belief there is a wide gap between the Ashkenazi, and the Sephardim.

One of the biggest mistakes the Arabs made was letting them leave Arab lands (whether forcibly or pressure). The argument that Israel is a colonial outpost has no validity when we take into consideration that these Jews, lived amongst us. Approximately 700,000 left Arab lands an equal amount of indigenous Palestinians that were displaced.

If there is no truth to this (and thats highly possible), Why are the Syrians not saying anything ? Why arent they rebutting it or even issuing a comment or statement or anything ?(I couldnt find any online, maybe someone can post a pointer?)

The NYT, at least its national and international news division, clearly remains in Judith Miller/Michael Gordon spoon-feeding mode. This is shabby, transmission belt, agitprop journalism at its worst. How can a paper with such an outstanding editorial page (at least for the most part) have at the same time such a sloppy, complicit news division?

How about some coordinates? How about some Google Earth photos of the alleged target, before and after? How about some actual checkable facts?

Unless such hard facts emerge, we have to pigeonhole such stuff as this hazy NYT report in the “disinformation” slot.

Frankly, the “edict” of the SY is blatantly racist. A convert is as good a Jew as anyone born to a Jewish mother. They should be ashamed of themselves. I am not proud to have such Jews in my nation, they give the rest of us a bad name. The upside is that there are only 75,000 of them.

Frankly, the “edict” of the SY is blatantly racist. A convert is as good a Jew as anyone born to a Jewish mother. They should be ashamed of themselves. I am not proud to have such Jews in my nation, they give the rest of us a bad name. The upside is that there are only 75,000 of them.

AIG; given your feelings towards them ( they are blatantly racist, I think they picked marrying from within the community – a Arab trait ), then using your logic, is the concept of Zionism which equates to a Jews only ideal equally racist? The same logic would apply to Muslims only or Arabs only or Christians only?

I just praised your solid investigative work, with my old Aleppo accent.

You quoted me commenting on a story that is totally different from today’s story 🙂

If you bothered to check the story that I voted against, it started as follows:

“In attacking Dair el Zor in Syria on Sept. 6, the Israeli air force wasn’t targeting a nuclear site but rather one of the main arms depots in the country.”

Since today’s story that you like to believe says that Israel actually hit a small nuclear reactor, I guess… I was “right”, no?

This is what I said:

“The story is false.

If Israel hit anything, it was not that dramatic.

So the only thing I believe is that whatever Israel hit was not worth hitting.

It might be too complicated for you to read between the lines, but at least please read ALL the lines next time.

Or I’ll make it easy for you. Here is a simple rule: Don’t bother trying to catch my mistakes. I have not been wrong on anything for the past two years I was boring you with my long comments.

Go back and try to prove I made a single mistake.

BTW, my typos don’t count as mistakes : )

And wishful thinking items from the M14 camp and from Saudi press and from the White House are also not related to reality until at least one of them is proven .. which is not the case after two years of daily creative accusations against Syria.

TO my Israeli friends who insist that Egypt is OK to sign peace with but not Syria, because “Syria supports terror”. Here is today’s editorial from Haaretz.

Egypt must decide
By Haaretz Editorial

While the Israeli and Palestinian negotiating teams are hard at work formulating a joint declaration ahead of the Annapolis peace conference at the end of November, developments along the border between the Gaza Strip and Egypt are casting a heavy pall over its chances of success. Since Hamas completed its takeover of Gaza in June, weapons smuggling from Sinai has mushroomed.

But you did not believe me … because you think I am “a regime apologist”.

By the way Akbar … I told you so. Over a year ago… I told you that Hamas gets its weapons from Egypt and it gets its money from private donations originating from the Gulf states and Saudi Arabia … or what we call “Arab moderates”

One of the tags on the floor says “global warming”, and the coat hanger is shaped like the word “Syria”. THe other tags say “Hariri assassination”, “Lebanon’s problems”, Iraq’s mess, Palestinian violence …

It seems I am your only Syria Comment colleague in North America who is awake at the time you are here? : )

The Dair El Zor Hoax
Why are the Israelis lying about striking a “nuclear facility” in Syria?
by Justin Raimondo
The great “mystery” arising out of the recent Israeli strike at Syria – purportedly targeting a nuclear-related site near the town of Dair El Zor in the northern part of the country – has been the subject of much speculation, but its real purposes have been hidden behind the veil of obfuscation deliberately thrown over the affair by the Israelis and their media amen corner. The gale winds of another Israeli propaganda campaign are blowing at full force across the American media landscape, perpetrating a hoax of outrageous proportions: namely, that the Israelis knocked out a nascent nuclear facility. In a replay of the disastrous Judith Miller fabrications, the Times makes it look like the Syrians, with North Korean assistance, had constructed a nuke plant that was just about to go online:

“The attack on the reactor project has echoes of an Israeli raid more than a quarter century ago, in 1981, when Israel destroyed the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq shortly before it was to have begun operating. That attack was officially condemned by the Reagan administration, though Israelis consider it among their military’s finest moments. In the weeks before the Iraq war, Bush administration officials said they believed that the attack set back Iraq’s nuclear ambitions by many years.”

What a lot of nonsense. The Iraqis had completed a nuclear facility that was fully operational and could have produced weapons-grade materials. The Syrian project has been going nowhere for 40 years, as Joseph Cirincione, author of Bomb Scare: The History and Future of Nuclear Weapons and a senior fellow and director for nuclear policy at the Center for American Progress, informs us:

“It is a basic research program built around a tiny 30 kilowatt reactor that produced a few isotopes and neutrons. It is nowhere near a program for nuclear weapons or nuclear fuel.”

Who cares about facts when you’ve got a perfectly good excuse to run a sensational headline? In any case, “many details remain unclear,” as the Times piece puts it, which gives the editors an out. However, I’d trust Laura Rozen before I’d trust the Times, and she relays the following far more plausible account from Intelligence Online:

“In attacking Dair El Zor in Syria on Sept. 6, the Israeli air force wasn’t targeting a nuclear site but rather one of the main arms depots in the country.

“Dair El Zor houses a huge underground base where the Syrian army stores the long and medium-range missiles it mostly buys from Iran and North Korea. The attack by the Israeli air force coincided with the arrival of a stock of parts for Syria’s 200 Scud B and 60 Scud C weapons.”

The moment this story hit the headlines, the alarm on my bullsh*t meter started clanging pretty loudly. But what, one wondered, was the purpose of this elaborate deception?

First, it was meant as a warning to Iran, a clear demonstration that the Israelis can and will act if Tehran fails to curb its ambition to join Israel as a full-fledged member of the nuclear club. Furthermore, it was meant to show Washington’s solidarity with Tel Aviv in this matter: in spite of doubts arising from the Rice-Gates faction within the administration, the Americans gave the Israelis the green light. It also, I believe, prefigures, on a much smaller scale, the sequence of events likely to trigger war with Iran: an Israeli strike, Iranian retaliation via Hezbollah, followed by American intervention, which would be practically inevitable.

Second, the Syrian hoax aims at derailing the recent U.S. agreement with North Korea to dismantle its nuclear apparatus. If North Korea is “proliferating,” it’s already in violation of the accord, and the neoconservatives in the administration and its periphery are already howling that the deal is off.

Third, and, in my view, most important in the long run, this whole propaganda campaign is designed to make an ideological point. As Joshua Muravchik put it in the Los Angeles Times Sunday morning:

“Law is largely a matter of practice and custom, and it is gradually changing to accommodate new realms of self-defense. Had American forces found nuclear weapons in Iraq, or a nuclear program nearly ready to produce weapons, the international assessment of our decision to invade would be very different today. That we made an appalling mistake about Iraqi WMD shows the risks of the new doctrine that Bush proposes – but it does not diminish the issue that gave rise to that doctrine.

“The evolution of our thinking about these issues will be at the forefront of the debate as Washington moves closer to a preemptive (or ‘preventive’) strike against Iran’s nuclear program.”

Yes, “the evolution of our thinking” will be helped along by the Israelis, who, as we know, are always in the vanguard when it comes to pushing the boundaries of prudence, not to mention morality and basic human decency. From “Israel has the right to defend itself,” a phrase we’ve heard with metronomic regularity over the years, the progression to “Israel has the right to preemptively attack whomever and whatever it pleases” – based on “secret” intelligence – is a cognitive leap made easier by Israeli boldness. What it’s all leading up to is an assault on Iran that may well be sparked by an Israeli provocation.

It’s fitting that the whole propaganda campaign is based on a gigantic lie, one that surpasses their previous record in its brazenness and sheer scope. This is the War Party’s signature style. In spite of reports that Israeli commandos landed on Syrian soil and made off with “nuclear materials” – a highly unlikely made-for-TV-movie scenario – one imagines that if this were true, they would have displayed the evidence by now. And what about the IAEA? Surely their scientists would have detected the nuclear emissions from such a bombing raid: yet we have seen no evidence, no announcement, no nothing. What’s up with that? It’s all verrrrrry suspicious.

As Joe Cirincione put it to the BBC:

“This appears to be the work of a small group of officials leaking cherry-picked, unvetted ‘intelligence’ to key reporters in order to promote a preexisting political agenda. If this sounds like the run-up to the war with Iraq, then it should.”

It’s the same gang, with the same agenda, only this time their lies are on a bigger scale – and the stakes are much higher. What’s amazing, to me, is that, even with this kind of record, these guys appear to be getting away with it. Once again, the major news media outlets are acting as conduits for war propaganda – and instead of displaying the least bit of skepticism, they’re more gullible than ever.

You are very confused about Zionism, it is simply the belief that Jews should have a homeland in Israel. Zionism is a secular movement, and is not related to Jewsih ideals. The moment the SY say that there is something better about someone born to a SY Jewish mother over a convert, they have crossed the line and become racists. Take a look at the book of Ruth in the bible to understand the Jewish philosophy about converts. It is completely different than what the SY believe. In fact, in my opinion, they are not Jews anymore if they keep their despicable “edict” just as Jews for Jesus are not Jews anymore.

Alex,

Mubarak is a nasty dictator and is playing with fire in Gaza. That does not change the fact one iota that Bashar is a nasty dictator that supports terrorism and should not be given the Golan. Realpolitic is a bitch but hey, who are you to complain since the Asads have been doing it for years?

It was refreshing to read a article concerning “Arab Jews”, and it reinforced my belief there is a wide gap between the Ashkenazi, and the Sephardim.

Enlightened,

cc: AIG

I always finding amusing when Arab participants on ME websites tire of posting anti-Israel propaganda, so they write the next best thing: they try to build wedges between the Mizrachi/Sephardi and the Ashkenasi.

As Israel and Zionism mature, the customs between the hundred plus communities in Israel begin to meld together. The Israeli language (Hebrew) includes many Ashkenasi (Yiddish) words as well as Mizrachi and even Arabic terms. Intermarriage is on the rise as communities and customs come together. Interestingly, over thousands of years, the Torah and the Jewish religion is, for all intents and purposes, identical between these communities.

Moreover, the Mizrachi and Sephardi community has long been known to carry ill feelings within their own communities. There have been Morroccan/Yemenite friction; Syrian/Yemenite friction; problems with the Gruzini (Georgian) communities; etc, etc… you name it … is been there.

However, as time progresses and as Israel assimilates the hundreds of Jewish communities from Russia, America, China, India, North Africa, Arabia, Austrailia, Europe, etc, the new Israeli character takes shape. Certainly, the variety does make Israel a interesting place to be, and it frequently provides a great opportunity to poke fun at.

Alex replies:

This is what I said:

“The story is false.

If Israel hit anything, it was not that dramatic.”

I think Israel hitting a military facility (nuclear or not) is very dramatic.

What story is false Alex?

Here is a simple rule: Don’t bother trying to catch my mistakes. I have not been wrong on anything for the past two years.

Lebanese military intelligence agents have detained seven people for allegedly being involved in the preparation of attacks against U.N. peacekeepers in southern Lebanon, the army said in a statement Monday.

The seven included some foreigners, but the statement didn’t give their nationalities or say whether they belonged to a specific organization.

The statement said the group planted a bomb near the southern city of Tyre aiming to target a U.N. patrol, but it didn’t explode due to a problem in the trigger.

The detainees also allegedly admitted they planned to plant two bombs in the same area and detonate them within a short period “in order to cause maximum casualties among the forces,” the statement said. The two bombs were confiscated, and the seven detainees were referred to judicial authorities, the army’s statement said. …AP

Lebanon arrests gang plotting attacks on UNIFIL

The Lebanese army said Monday it had arrested a gang of foreigners who were plotting attacks on UN peacekeepers patrolling the south of the country.

“The Lebanese army’s secret service arrested a network of non-Lebanese terrorists who were watching the movements of UN Interim Force in Lebanon [UNIFIL] troops in Southern Lebanon and who were planning to carry out attacks against them,” the army said. …

“Our probe showed that the network planted an explosive device along the main road between Abbasseya and Jall Bahr, near Tyre, targeting a UNIFIL patrol, but the device failed to explode,” the army said in a statement.

An army spokesman would only say that members of the group were arrested this week in the southern coastal region of Tyre, without giving more details on their identity.

He said the network was planning two other attacks in the same area with the aim of killing a large number of UNIFIL troops, adding that two devices were seized. …AFP

“Yet, according to the safeguard agreement, a government is not obligated to report to the IAEA on the start of construction of a nuclear reactor. A state is required to report on the reactor once building reaches the final stages, or a reasonable amount of time prior to the reactor’s activation.

In the event that Syria’s reactor was built for civilian purposes and for research only, then Damascus would not be in violation of its commitments to the IAEA and to the NNPT, even if it did not report on the start of its construction.”Haaretz

“A Vienna diplomat close to the IAEA said it had initiated contacts with Damascus shortly after the air raid but the Syrians had provided no clarification yet.
…

The Vienna diplomat said that if Syria was indeed building a new reactor, it would have been required to inform the agency, and provide design data, as soon as it decided to construct one.

No country had provided satellite or other intelligence about the alleged plant to the IAEA although such help would be crucial to detecting such a site, added the diplomat, who asked not to be named due to the topic’s political sensitivity.”Reuters

1) The US did not want the North Koreans to lose face and jeopardize the 6 nation talks. Therefore, it was convenient for the US that no direct allegations were made at North Korea. Even so, the talks were delayed a week.

2) By keeping silent, Israel has allowed the Syrians not to respond without losing face. The Syrians had plausible deniability and did not look weak in the Arab world. Thus Israel has gotten rid of the nuclear plant without causing a war.

The story that you linked to where you took my comments criticizing the story AP … that story said that Israel hit a convoy with weapons coming from a Syrian port to Eastern Syria … I said that THAT story is wrong.

And “dramatic” or not dramatic referred to “nuclear weapons” that they neocons were trying to accuse Syria of having. I meant that whatever Israel hit is not going to one day make us all stunned … we know that Syria has weapons and military bases, no?

Here is a simple rule: Don’t bother trying to catch my mistakes. I have not been wrong on anything for the past two years.

Teach us more about denial Alex;) Sheeesh!

Provide examples where I was wrong AP and I’ll be happy to work on my denial issues.

I dont agree.
1) The US did not want the North Koreans to lose face and jeopardize the 6 nation talks. So North Koreans are now free to send thei nuclear equipment to other countries, Sudan, Cuba?? and the US. for the sake of the talk give a blind eyes???2) By keeping silent, Israel has allowed the Syrians not to respond without losing face. Israeli know very well that Syria does not have the power to respond militarely and since when Israel worry about any arab country not loosing face??

I am more encline to believe the lastest report of a ‘legal’ nuclear plant mistook by israel as a ‘illegal’ nuclear plant. I think the word ‘nuclear’ is triggering hysterical reaction from Israel. If it was an illegal’ nuclear plant, they would have claimed it to the world to isolate more Syria. As it turned out to be a ‘legal’ one, they preferred to shut up not be seen as having made a blunder. The Syrians, because they were incapable of shooting the planes and because they prefer to avoid mentionning the sesame word ‘nuclear’ tended to minimize the significance of the event. Any way Israel will have to face the fact the Iran is getting close to mastering the nuclear energy and that will mushroom soon in the area, without the help of North Korea, but with Iranian and Russian help.

Israel does not really care if the plant is legal or not.
Ask yourself why neither the Russians, Chinese or Europeans condemed the attack? Everybody is happy except the Syrians, Iranians and North Koreans.

Let me make it very clear to you. Israel will attempt to bomb the Iranian facilities if all else fails and the US decides not to do it. Maybe Israel will not succeed, but it will certainly try. Most Israelis would rather fight Iran now than wait until it is nuclear.

People like you were saying the same thing before Israel attacked Osirak. The convoluted logic was ridiculous then as it was now. And what did your hero Saddam do then? Nothing. I expect that the Iranians will also do nothing, but I am prepared for the worst. Let the Iranians shoot their missiles at us. Our retaliation will be to take out their oil industry. Let Hizballah and Syria start a war. You know exactly what the result will be.

I’m glad you’re posting here because you are truly expressing the Israeli psyche and its complete disdain and hatred for all people around you. You want to attack countries because they are attempting to build even a minimal ability to deter Israeli attacks and defend themselves against aerial assaults. On the other hand, you believe it is your right to possess over 300 nuclear warheads as well as the most powerful military machine in the region.

In any case, do what you will and we will do what we will. If you feel confident that you can subdue all countries and people around you, then by all means go ahead. We will prepare ourselves as best we can and if we cannot succeed, then I guess this is what our fate is. However, don’t go crying to the world when Israel is targeted with missiles and rockets, and Israelis begin leaving their homes and towns for shelter.

Here is something to read and ponder and to perhaps bring some sanity to our “chosen friends” on this web site from Uri Avnery

The Mother of all Pretexts

By: Uri Avnery

WHEN I hear mention of the “Clash of Civilizations” I don’t know whether to laugh or to cry.

To laugh, because it is such a silly notion.

To cry, because it is liable to cause untold disasters.

To cry even more, because our leaders are exploiting this slogan as a pretext for sabotaging any possibility of an Israeli-Palestinian reconciliation. It is just one more in a long line of pretexts.

WHY WAS the Zionist movement in need of excuses to justify the way it treated the Palestinian people?

At its birth, it was an idealistic movement. It laid great weight on its moral basis. Not just in order to convince the world, but above all in order to set its own conscience at rest.

From early childhood we learned about the pioneers, many of them sons and daughters of well-to-do and well-educated families, who left behind a comfortable life in Europe in order to start a new life in a far-away and – by the standards of the time – primitive country. Here, in a savage climate they were not used to, often hungry and sick, they performed bone-breaking physical labor under a brutal sun.

For that, they needed an absolute belief in the rightness of their cause. Not only did they believe in the need to save the Jews of Europe from persecution and pogroms, but also in the creation of a society so just as never seen before, an egalitarian society that would be a model for the entire world. Leo Tolstoy was no less important for them than Theodor Herzl. The kibbutz and the moshav were symbols of the whole enterprise.

But this idealistic movement aimed at settling in a country inhabited by another people. How to bridge this contradiction between its sublime ideals and the fact that their realization necessitated the expulsion of the people of the land?

The easiest way was to repress the problem altogether, ignoring its very existence: the land, we told ourselves, was empty, there was no people living here at all. That was the justification that served as a bridge over the moral abyss.

Only one of the Founding Fathers of the Zionist movement was courageous enough to call a spade a spade. Ze’ev Jabotinsky wrote as early as 80 years ago that it was impossible to deceive the Palestinian people (whose existence he recognized) and to buy their consent to the Zionist aspirations. We are white settlers colonizing the land of the native people, he said, and there is no chance whatsoever that the natives will resign themselves to this voluntarily. They will resist violently, like all the native peoples in the European colonies. Therefore we need an “Iron Wall” to protect the Zionist enterprise.

When Jabotinsky was told that his approach was immoral, he replied that the Jews were trying to save themselves from the disaster threatening them in Europe, and, therefore, their morality trumped the morality of the Arabs in Palestine.

Most Zionists were not prepared to accept this force-oriented approach. They searched fervently for a moral justification they could live with.

Thus started the long quest for justifications – with each pretext supplanting the previous one, according to the changing spiritual fashions in the world.

THE FIRST justification was precisely the one mocked by Jabotinsky: we were actually coming to benefit the Arabs. We shall redeem them from their primitive living conditions, from ignorance and disease. We shall teach them modern methods of agriculture and bring them advanced medicine. Everything – except employment, because we needed every job for the Jews we were bringing here, which we were transforming from ghetto-Jews into a people of workers and tillers of the soil.

When the ungrateful Arabs went on to resist our grand project, in spite of all the benefits we were supposedly bringing them, we found a Marxist justification: It’s not the Arabs who oppose us, but only the “effendis”. The rich Arabs, the great landowners, are afraid that the glowing example of the egalitarian Hebrew community would attract the exploited Arab proletariat and cause them to rise against their oppressors.

That, too, did not work for long, perhaps because the Arabs saw how the Zionists bought the land from those very same “effendis” and drove out the tenants who had been cultivating it for generations.

The rise of the Nazis in Europe brought masses of Jews to the country. The Arab public saw how the land was being withdrawn from under their feet, and started a rebellion against the British and the Jews in 1936. Why, the Arabs asked, should they pay for the persecution of the Jews by the Europeans? But the Arab Revolt gave us a new justification: the Arabs support the Nazis. And indeed, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Husseini, was photographed sitting next to Hitler. Some people “discovered” that the Mufti was the real instigator of the Holocaust. (Years later it was revealed that Hitler had detested the Mufti, who had no influence whatsoever over the Nazis.)

World War II came to an end, to be followed by the 1948 war. Half of the vanquished Palestinian people became refugees. That did not trouble the Zionist conscience, because everybody knew: They ran away of their own free will. Their leaders had called upon them to leave their homes, to return later with the victorious Arab armies. True, no evidence was ever found to support this absurd claim, but it has sufficed to soothe our conscience to this day.

It may be asked: why were the refugees not allowed to come back to their homes once the war was over? Well, it was they who in 1947 rejected the UN partition plan and started the war. If because of this they lost 78% of their country, they have only themselves to blame.

Then came the Cold War. We were, of course, on the side of the “Free World”, while the great Arab leader, Gamal Abd-al-Nasser, got his weapons from the Soviet bloc. (True, in the 1948 war the Soviet arms flowed to us, but that’s not important.) It was quite clear: No use talking with the Arabs, because they support Communist tyranny.

But the Soviet bloc collapsed. “The terrorist organization called PLO”, as Menachem Begin used to call it, recognized Israel and signed the Oslo agreement. A new justification had to be found for our unwillingness to give back the occupied territories to the Palestinian people.

The salvation came from America: a professor named Samuel Huntington wrote a book about the “Clash of Civilizations”. And so we found the mother of all pretexts.

THE ARCH-ENEMY, according to this theory, is Islam. Western Civilization, Judeo-Christian, liberal, democratic, tolerant, is under attacked from the Islamic monster, fanatical, terrorist, murderous.

Islam is murderous by nature. Actually, “Muslim” and “terrorist” are synonymous. Every Muslim is a terrorist, every terrorist a Muslim.

A sceptic might ask: How did it happen that the wonderful Western culture gave birth to the Inquisition, the pogroms, the burning of witches, the annihilation of the Native Americans, the Holocaust, the ethnic cleansings and other atrocities without number – but that was in the past. Now Western culture is the embodiment of freedom and progress.

Professor Huntington was not thinking about us in particular. His task was to satisfy a peculiar American craving: the American empire always needs a virtual, world-embracing enemy, a single enemy which includes all the opponents of the United States around the world. The Communists delivered the goods – the whole world was divided between Good Guys (the Americans and their supporters) and Bad Guys (the Commies). Everybody who opposed American interests was automatically a Communist – Nelson Mandela in South Africa, Salvador Allende in Chile, Fidel Castro in Cuba, while the masters of Apartheid, the death squads of Augusto Pinochet and the secret police of the Shah of Iran belonged, like us, to the Free World.

When the Communist empire collapsed, America was suddenly left without a world-wide enemy. This vacuum has now been filled by the Muslims-Terrorists. Not only Osama bin Laden, but also the Chechnyan freedom fighters, the angry North-African youth of the Paris banlieus, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, the insurgents in the Philippines.

Thus the American world view rearranged itself: a good world (Western Civilization) and a bad world (Islamic civilization). Diplomats still take care to make a distinction between “radical Islamists” and “moderate Muslims”, but that is only for appearances’ sake. Between ourselves, we know of course that they are all Osama bin Ladens. They are all the same.

This way, a huge part of the world, composed of manifold and very different countries, and a great religion, with many different and even opposing tendencies (like Christianity, like Judaism), which has given the world unmatched scientific and cultural treasures, is thrown into one and the same pot.

THIS WORLD VIEW is tailored for us. Indeed, the world of the clashing civilizations is, for us, the best of all possible worlds.

The struggle between Israel and the Palestinians is no longer a conflict between the Zionist movement, which came to settle in this country, and the Palestinian people, which inhabited it. No, it has been from the very beginning a part of a world-wide struggle which does not stem from our aspirations and actions. The assault of terrorist Islam on the Western world did not start because of us. Our conscience can be entirely clean – we are among the good guys of this world.

This is now the line of argument of official Israel: the Palestinians elected Hamas, a murderous Islamic movement. (If it didn’t exist, it would have to be invented – and indeed, some people assert it was created from the start by our secret service.) Hamas is terroristic, and so is Hizbullah. Perhaps Mahmoud Abbas is not a terrorist himself, but he is weak and Hamas is about to take sole control over all Palestinian territories. So we cannot talk with them. We have no partner. Actually, we cannot possibly have a partner, because we belong to Western Civilization, which Islam wants to eradicate.

IN HIS 1896 book “Der Judenstaat”, Theodor Herzl, the official Israeli “Prophet of the State”, prophesied this development, too.

This is what he wrote in 1896: “For Europe we shall constitute (in Palestine) a part of the wall against Asia, we shall serve as a vanguard of culture against barbarism.”

Herzl was thinking of a metaphoric wall, but in the meantime we have put up a very real one. For many, this is not just a Separation Wall between Israel and Palestine. It is a part of the world-wide wall between the West and Islam, the front-line of the Clash of Civilizations. Beyond the wall there are not men, women and children, not a conquered and oppressed Palestinian population, not choked towns and villages like Abu-Dis, a-Ram, Bil’in and Qalqilia. No, beyond the wall there are a billion terrorists, multitudes of blood-thirsty Muslims, who have only one desire in life: to throw us into the sea, simply because we are Jews, part of Judeo-Christian Civilization.

With an official position like that – who is there to talk to? What is there to talk about? What is the point of meeting in Annapolis or anywhere else?

And what is left to us to do – to cry or to laugh?

* An Israeli author and activist. He is the head of the Israeli peace movement, “Gush Shalom”.

Close: Israeli Intelligence behind Syria Strike not Persuasive
The NYT has been pushing the story that the Israeli air strike on Syria on September 6 came in response to intelligence that Syria was building a nuclear reactor at the site with clandestine North Korean help. There are reasons to question the accuracy of the Israeli story, which at some points has included allegations that there was evidence of enriched nuclear material at the site; such material could only be produced at the end of a long research and construction project, not at the beginning. The Israelis are trigger-happy and their intelligence on the Arab world is most often sloppy (the then head of Mossad is still insisting that Iraq had WMD), so one cannot assume there was anything to their apprehensions. In the absence of any inspection of the bombed site, one cannot assume there wasn’t, either. The strike probably killed the November peace process summit that Condi Rice had been working toward; Syria says it won’t attend.

Retired CIA analyst of Arab affairs Ray Close tells us what he thinks about it all:

“This is my Monday morning (speculative) analysis of the mysterious Israeli air attack on Syria on September 6, 2007 . . :

1. The Israelis offered us intelligence that Syria is beginning to develop a nuclear capability based on North Korean technology. They urged the US to cooperate with them in mounting a military attack to destroy the Syrian site. The advantages of this action, as presented to the Bush administration with great urgency by the Israelis, would be:

a. To preempt a new and dangerous violation of Israeli and American proliferation red lines before the Syrian program gets too far along (citing the Iranian experience for justification);

b. To intimidate and embarrass Syria; throw a scare into Iran; and restore Israel’s deterrence credibility. (The historic examples of dramatically successful and awe-inspiring Israeli operations at Entebbe and Osirak, among others, still have great psychological and emotional impact.)

Israel does not really care if the plant is legal or not.
Ask yourself why neither the Russians, Chinese or Europeans condemed the attack? Everybody is happy except the Syrians, Iranians and North Koreans.

Let’s follow the spiel of the Israeli apologists on this forum as to not get confused, using AIG’s rhetoric.

Their main evidence of the “nuclear reactor” is that Syria and North Korea have condemned the Israeli attack. Well what else to wait from Syria as a target and from North Korea blamed of technical and material “support”. Other countries can not condemn the attack because there is not enough official information from Israel of the attacks target and arguments to justify it. Only thing that exists are anonymous officials’ statements and analysts speculating more or less wildly in the press.

As an engineer by education it is rather difficult to understand why Israeli commando troops took soil samples, as claimed, from the reactor’s building site before and after the attack. There is no nuclear fuel in a reactor building that is years from the finishing point. If the site was something else (like related with chemical weapons or nuclear enrichment) the soil samples make more sense. But not with an unfinished nuclear reactor building which is only concrete and metal.

The United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency on Monday broke its silence over an Israel Air Force strike last month that reportedly targeted a Syrian nuclear facility, and urged any parties with information on Damascus’ nuclear plans to come forward.

Now Israel has to give more information or it is the one who in the end will loose its face.

2) By keeping silent, Israel has allowed the Syrians not to respond without losing face. The Syrians had plausible deniability and did not look weak in the Arab world. Thus Israel has gotten rid of the nuclear plant without causing a war.

That is pure stupidity. Why should spare Syria of loosing face, when Israel has just made Syria loose face by an illegal attack. Makes no sense at all. Well maybe for some Israelis.

The Israeli apologists refuse to use common sense to consider seriously why is Israel not telling more of the target. It would be a public victory for Israel (and USA) to show real evidence that Syria and North Korea are building nuclear weapon capacity in Syria. What is the sense in being officially silent and only letting rumours to the “market”? The only logical conclusion one can make is that the Israeli “evidence” is extremely weak.

With information with Osirak Israel didn’t hesitate. They “painted ” to the public a picture where Israel on the last second had boldly destroyed a full scale nuclear weapon program. Naturally Israeli propagandists do not want the world to remember, that Osirak was a small experimental light water reactor under IAEA supervision.

The US/Israeli “sources” are frequently saying that Middle Eastern countries minus naturally Israel do not need nuclear energy because they have so much gas and oil. That is a rather weak excuse, remembering that USA was ready to sell 10 nuclear power stations to the Shah, that enlightened democratic leader. Also on economical basis the excuses is rather amusing. If one can produce energy cheaper with nuclear energy than using gas and oil, why use income brining assets.

The September figures brought the average monthly deficit for the first nine months of the year to $795m., or $9.5b. in annualized terms. The trade deficit for 2006 was $7.6b.
….
Exports to the US make up some 40 percent of total Israeli shipments abroad, generating $18b., while imports from the US total $6b.

About half of Israeli exports to the US are compromised of diamonds; the remainder come mostly from the telecommunications, software and chemicals industries.

I knew about the diamond industry in Israel, but its importance and level was an astonishment for me.

When from Israel’s exports diamonds represent a lion’s share (about 50 % of export to USA and more than 30 percent of the export to EU) makes the conclusion, that the Zionist project is much based on the vanity of western women, justified. And naturally the cheap of blood diamonds imported from Africa gives room for further conclusions. It explains better why Israelis are so eager to sell weapons to Africa’s and Asia’s conflict zones and to child soldiers. Viva free trade and democracy.

I recall when Prince Fahd bin Abdal Aziz called me to a meeting very late one evening in the early days of the 1973 war and asked me to send an urgent personal message from him to Richard Nixon informing the president that he had felt obliged to contribute a brigade of Saudi troops to the Golan front to support the Syrian offensive there, but that he had personally instructed the commander of the unit not to fire a single shot. That, Fahd told me with considerable emotion and obvious sincerity, was his solemn promise to his American friend.

The raving Lutheran antisemite is back with the usual faulty logic and distortion.

1) The main evidence there was an attack on a nuclear facility is reporting by the New York Times. Not the North Korean or Syrian condemnation.

2) There is suspicion that North Korea transferred pultonium to Syria. That is why soil samples are very useful.

3) The Syrians in fact denied until now that anything important was hit and this abolished the need on their part to react immediately. You still believe that nothing important was hit so the strategy is working. If people like you believe the Syrians, they will not wonder why Syria is not hitting back. Why would it if nothing was hit? So Israel being quiet is working very well.

4) Osirak was different because Israel and Iraq don’t share a border and the attack could not have led to war anyway. In this case, the situation is more sensitive and Israel played its cards well and was able to bomb the nuclear plant without war erupting.

5) The diamond export is very little value added. Israel is only a way station for the diamonds. It is usually taken out of the account in reporting imports and exports of Israel because it doesn’t mean much and causes simpletons like you to be confused. Most of the Israeli diamond industry moved to India in the last 20 years.

Israel seems to be really desperate if they needed to attack military weak Syria instead of trying sonething against Iran to rehabilitate their IDF’s damaged reputation!

I expect that the Iranians will also do nothing, but I am prepared for the worst. Let the Iranians shoot their missiles at us. Our retaliation will be to take out their oil industry

You really think that after having fought a dirty war of 8 years against Saddam, helped by the Western biological weapons, having lost thousand of lives and people suffering of the poisonous gaz until now, the Iranians will stay put! Someone on CNN argued that Iran will not dare attack Israel because of the fear they may damage the holy sites, but they can very well attack many industrial areas and inflict huge damages. Iran is not the weak and pompous Irak of the Osirak. Their nuclear sites are numerous and well protected. They nationalism is very strong. Israel will commit a suicide in attacking Iran. Now maybe you prefer that than to negotiate the withdrawal of occupied lands.. I guess it is not Israeli’s most favorable choice! and that may explains the ridiculous and pathetic attack on a baby nuclear factory in Syria.

The raving Lutheran antisemite is back with the usual faulty logic and distortion.

AIG you you are the last to critizize anybody’s religion. By the way Lutheranism is the main religion in Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Norway (about 80 to 90 percent of the population). You certainly know perfectly well our less anti-Semitic history and present situation. That’s why we Nordic people with good conscience can critizize your miserable “Jewish democracy”. By the way Ben-Sasson drafts constitution – ‘Jewish,’ but not ‘equal’ A joke of a all constitutions…

To your previous comments to my mothers family murdering your family I wrote a lengthy answer to it, but as sometimes happens with this “forum” the system lost my post. So I did bother to rewrite an answer to your pathetic claims.

Your unbelievable comment of my mothers family murdering your family, show your own level. Nobody of my mothers relatives served in SS and in the concentration camps or were members of the Nazi party. They were normal industrial workers and farmers living in small villages. If I would use your tactics in discussing I could say that it is a know fact that Communism was created by Jews (Marx and Engels had Jewish background). Early Soviet Union had extremely many Jewish leaders (even by some sources, though rather disputable, Stalin was a Jew) so I could say that your family has murdered my both my fathers and mothers family members and stolen a huge junk of my fatherland. However I am not so pathetic as you so I do not make such rather far fetched link between you and me.

I have noticed your decline to the argumentation level to level of the mother of wisdom and knowledge, Akbar the Great Draft Dodger. When you started commenting you made some sense, but lately you have shown your real mental capacity. No wonder that both you and AP are nowadays constantly referring to each others comments. However 0 + 0 is still only zero.

By the way AIG are an Haredi? One of those moderate, secular, democratic Israelis?

5) The diamond export is very little value added. Israel is only a way station for the diamonds.

Really, you believe what you are saying? Well what if Israel buys the diamonds with one dollar plus 1000 Uzis from a war lord and then sells them with 10 million USD to USA. Good business in Israeli style. Why is Israel a way station of diamonds if you ship them to India (which means that there should not be any export of diamonds to USA and EU from Israel. The trade should be in India’s trade). Or do you mean that the diamonds go first to Israel then to India and back to Israel. Maybe this is to complicated to answer for you, who is studying Torah and not economical issues.

I have no problems with Lutherans, just with raving antisemites Lutherans like you and Luther.

If you have proof the Israel deals with blood diamonds, bring it forth. The Israel Diamond Exchange is mostly for polished diamonds. The raw African diamonds go to Antwerp you moron. Perhaps you will have something nice to say about Belgium now.

Most Austrians were happy to accept Hitler. Were any of your family in the Wermacht? I am sure some were. If so they helped take over Poland and kill my family. They fought knowingly for a racist tyrant and obeyed his commands. Yes, there were some Jews in Stalin’s regime. They were a despicable lot. But 99.999% of Jews in the world were not communists or in the Stalin regime. Contrast this with the fact that most Austrians supported Hitler and served in his army, as your family did. So yes, your family killed my family. But I forgive you, and don’t want anything from you.

You are the classic modern European antisemite. You try to impose an impossible standard on Jews while never measuring yourself by this standard. All the time concealing your intentions as a liberal in support of peace. The example of Israel trading with Burma was just one such example.

AIG; given your feelings towards them ( they are blatantly racist, I think they picked marrying from within the community – a Arab trait ), then using your logic, is the concept of Zionism which equates to a Jews only ideal equally racist? The same logic would apply to Muslims only or Arabs only or Christians only?

Feel free to explain!

AIG responded;

Enlightened,

You are very confused about Zionism, it is simply the belief that Jews should have a homeland in Israel. Zionism is a secular movement, and is not related to Jewsih ideals. The moment the SY say that there is something better about someone born to a SY Jewish mother over a convert, they have crossed the line and become racists. Take a look at the book of Ruth in the bible to understand the Jewish philosophy about converts. It is completely different than what the SY believe. In fact, in my opinion, they are not Jews anymore if they keep their despicable “edict” just as Jews for Jesus are not Jews anymore.

AIG I think that you have have misinterpreted my question; if you read the question posed, my rhetoric indicates that ideals that are presented as Jews only, Muslims only, Christians only are all racist and exclusionary, in my earlier comments I said the Arabs made a huge mistake in letting the Sephardic Jews leave Arab lands through emigration whether forced or through pressure.

You state that as Jews are integrated into Israeli society, you are blending cultures into one, wow big deal, it does not alter the fact about my premise that an ideal based on the exclusion of another person because he is not Jewish/Christian/ or Muslim is not racist! It is racist in it its entirety, much the same way that Jews are excluded from attending Mecca, or Christians.

Akbar Pontificates’

Enlightened,

cc: AIG

I always finding amusing when Arab participants on ME websites tire of posting anti-Israel propaganda, so they write the next best thing: they try to build wedges between the Mizrachi/Sephardi and the Ashkenasi.

Akbar You are a moron of the highest degree, You have accused me of inciting and writing ant isreali propoganda before I challenge you as I did last time to show me the evidence!

Do not lump me with most Arab participants on ME websites, for every Anti Israeli propoganda we can highlight many Anti Arab propoganda as well.

Please be kind to SimoHurtta. His participation on this website is of prime importance as we undercover the great attrocities the Zionist machine is guilty of.

The Zionist Entity refuses to roll over dead, and thus, the Zionist sin continues.

AIG, unfortunately you are part of the Zionist enterprise. Your have a large weight to bear for Zionist crimes against humanity and against the innocent Arabs and Muslims who have wanted to destroy your country for the past 60 years.

Most Austrians were happy to accept Hitler. Were any of your family in the Wermacht? I am sure some were.

Of course they were. Both in German and Finnish armies. Everybody in military age had to go. Like also in Israel you have to go. “Small” people in countries at war have to fight always in wars started by lunatics. They do not regrettably have much options in such situations. You AIG still have an possibility, use your other or third passport and ship your family to a safe place.

You are the classic modern European antisemite. You try to impose an impossible standard on Jews while never measuring yourself by this standard. All the time concealing your intentions as a liberal in support of peace. The example of Israel trading with Burma was just one such example.

Impossible standard for Jews, especially for Israeli Jews? Like what, treating others with respect and democratically. No illegal weapon trade, no drug smuggling, no selling bloody gemstones etc. Well certainly some Finns smuggle drugs but do we sell illegal arms and blood gemstones in huge quantity – no. Do we occupy neighbours land and treat the people of those regions like shit – no we don’t. Do we constantly pick up fight with others and bomb Russian and Swedish “nuclear reactors” – no, neither they ours. Do we steal our Jewish citizens land and demolish their houses – no, ask your Finnish bothers in faith.

What is your problem with Israel’s trading weapons to Burma? Do you claim it doesn’t exists? Well if Nokia sells some mobile telephones to Burma it only increases democracy, machine guns for dictators not. Is it anti-Semitic to say that?

If you have proof the Israel deals with blood diamonds, bring it forth. The Israel Diamond Exchange is mostly for polished diamonds. The raw African diamonds go to Antwerp you moron. Perhaps you will have something nice to say about Belgium now.

An Israeli firm, International Diamond Industries (IDI), headed by Dan Gertler, was awarded an 18-month monopoly on diamond exports from the DRC in July 2000 through the company’s subsidiary IDI-Congo, to take effect 30 days after signature. The contract was repealed in April 2001, although the company continues its purchasing operations. At the time of signing, the DRC minister of Mines, Bishikwabo Chubaka, defended the diamond monopoly:

“This is the optimum way for the Congo diamond production to be marketed in a transparent manner that will inspire trust and confidence in the country’s certificate of origin, which will accompany each and every parcel to be exported by IDI.”4

Nearly one year later, certificates of origin have yet to be instituted. Despite government officials defending the contract as a means to prevent the export of conflict diamonds and increase state revenue, the deal was in reality meant to provide cash for the war effort, as well as military assistance, presumably from the Israelis.5

Nkingi, one of the signatories of the contract, mentioned a possible venture with Israeli military specialists working in the DRC as part of the deal for the IDI-Congo contract. He alluded that the Israeli army would assist with training the police anti-smuggling unit and that this deal was one of the reasons why the company was chosen.23 This was denied by IDI-Congo, the Israeli Defence Ministry and the DRC government, with Nkingi later jailed for unspecified reasons. Chorev, IDI-Congo’s spokesperson, noted that IDI-Congo was “not directly involved in any military operation.”24

Copies of alleged correspondence between Dan Gertler Diamonds (DGD) and the DRC government show that Gertler had attempted to enter the country since early 1998, before IDI-Congo had been formed.25 One letter, dated 12 March 1998 in Kinshasa and addressed to the minister of Mines, Kibassa Maliba, noted that DGD is a capable diamond trading company. It refers to its activities in Russia, Sierra Leone and Guinea, and states that the company “owns and operates its own mining, transportation and security equipment, and trains its own personnel.” It proposed a contract for the purchase US $2 billion in rough diamonds over a period of 24 months. A memorandum of intent, dated 12 March 1998, is allegedly part of the correspondence between Maliba and Gertler over the proposed contract.26 The last paragraph of the memorandum mentions a company named the Russian Military Brotherhood (RMB), created by presidential decree on 23 June 1995 in Russia, and refers to contracts concluded between RMB and DGD on 25 February 1998.

Diamond industry sources in Belgium allege that there could be a business relationship between Gertler and Lev Leviev, one of the principals in Angola’s diamond monopoly, with further allegations that Leviev had helped Gertler to secure the DRC monopoly and that the Angolan government had lobbied Kinshasa to continue the IDI-Congo contract. These unsubstantiated rumours led to suggestions of a common link between Israeli and Russian interests, and were further fuelled by reports that a Russian named Bill Davidson works for IDI-Congo, reportedly as the company’s representative.33 IDI-Congo indicated that he is a Russian, doing freelance work for many organisations.34

“difficult to believe that Gertler would become involved in an arms deal in the Congo after he lost a considerable amount of money in Sierra Leone, and his mother and grand-father would not have allowed it in any case.”35

In September 1999, it was noted in the media that Gertler was linked to Dov Katz and Yair Klein in a programme of diamond purchases in exchange for military training and arms deliveries in Liberia and Sierra Leone in 1997.36 Katz was the link between Gertler, providing financing, and Klein, providing the training. The operation failed due to convoluted military and political developments in Sierra Leone that led to the lengthy imprisonment of Klein in Freetown under suspicion of arming the rebels. Klein had reportedly been involved in training for the Medellin drug cartel in Colombia in the 1980s.37 He was convicted in Israel of illegally exporting military equipment and has evaded a warrant for his arrest in the US for his activities in Colombia.38 IDI-Congo currently has a buying operation in Sierra Leone.39

etc.

AIG, the article doesn’t mention Syria, Iran or North Korea. Strange isn’t it? Seems that Israel is the “giant” Mafia state with the help of brothers in faith from Russia.

Now I also understand the real reason why Israel is selling weapons to Burma’s junta. Gemstones naturally for Israel. Hmmmm…

PS I am wondering whether your sarcasm is a little over the head of some of the “engineers” on this forum

Don’t worry AIG. You and Abkar are not masters of sarcasm. You are both rather one-ideaed simple spiritual Nazis.

Right, your family had no option. Of course they had, they could have refused to fight for Hitler and hidden or ran away. But they chose to do it. Shows you what your family really thought and it seems that by justifying them, you don’t think much differently. But we already know this.

Nokia is NOW selling the junta in Burma telecommunications equipment. And you want to say that this is helping the Burmese? Nokia is profiting from licenses granted by the junta. Try to digest that. And you compare it to a deal Elbit did 10 years ago? You really are shameless.

I asked you to give evidence that Israel was complicit in blood diamond trade. You dug up a site that shows that some Israelis were maybe complicit. So, do you still say that Israel as a state sanctions the trade in blood diamonds and participates in it? Or since you found no evidence for your blood libel, you are shifting the subject?

Let me explain to you again why you are an antisemite. You ask whether the Finns bombed a Swedish reactor. But have the Swedes, promised to attack Finland lately? Hussein promised to “liberate Palestine” and annihilate Israel and that is why Osirak was attacked. Yet you compare Sweden to the Baath regime in Iraq. That is so out of whack that it borders on lunacy. You judge Israel by a strange standard that says that Israel cannot react to threats against it. You try to portray Saddam as if he is the Swedish prime minister to make your point. You are a vile antisemite.

Do we occupy neighbours land and treat the people of those regions like shit – no we don’t. Do we constantly pick up fight with others and bomb Russian and Swedish “nuclear reactors” – no, neither they ours. Do we steal our Jewish citizens land and demolish their houses – no, ask your Finnish bothers in faith.

Here are my simple answers (in typical Jewish “qusestion” form):

Has Finland been in a state of war since her creation (the past 60 years)? Has Finland had to live through 5 major wars and under a constant state of terrorism? Have numerous neighboring countries threatened to annihilate your country? Did some neighboring European country succeed in murdering 1/3 of your countrymen? Did the Finns steal their land from the Swedes or the Soviets? How many Finns died in their own little Civil War?

Who do we blame for these crimes against humanity?

SimoHurrta,

cc: AIG

My suggestion (and it is only a suggestion), is the following:

When you can say you’ve experienced the same attacks against your country (Finland) that Israel has had to endure since her independence, than you can “cry foul”. At this point, I would do considerably more listening than talking right now.
__________________

AIG,

Don’t get your hopes up with Hillary and her gang of two-faced politicos. As if Oslo and Camp David 2000 wasn’t enough of a farce, I would hope Israel woulnd make the same mistake twice.

The Clintons (if their 8 years of administration isn’t enough proof) will not commit the military to confront terrorism the way Bush, Cheney, Gates and Rice have. The Clintons and their wet-noodle advisors believe you can confront terrorism with pieces of paper and frequent-flyer miles.

Good morning
Our extended dialogue has taken our attention away from the lead topic for this thread. I do not intend to demean that dialogue, it has been intense and revealing. Back to the topic –
– A collegue early in this thread asked if it takes several years to build a reactor, why the need act now, why the sense of emergency? Another asked where Syria planned to get the needed uranium if the reactor had been built. A third asked why the continued silence in the ME capitals.
– The second is easiest to answer, Iran. Possibly North Korea in the short term.
– As to the first and third, there seems to be no clear asnswer. A 3 to 5 year time line for constructing a reactor is inconsistent with an imminent sense of danger. The continued silence in the ME capitals signals the topic is so highly sensitive public discourse could lead to dangerous position taking (the Sarajavo effect), or an unwillingness to publically admit the strike by Israel removed a danger to their countries.
– Both inconsistencies support the conclusion there is more to this story to be revealed and those revelations will very discomforting. My hypothesis remains there was nuclear activity at that site, the activity was not enrichment, there was a genuine fear that the materials at that site might be used in the very near future and the activity was not financed by Syria
– One lesson Damascus learned, or should learn, is it is not wise to stick you finger in the eyes of your Arab neighbors – you may need their support.

After Israel bombed a Syrian military facility last September, the United States and Israel both claimed the target had been a Syrian nuclear facility under construction.

RAW STORY‘s Larisa Alexandrovna was alone at the time in reporting that the actual target was a cache of North Korean No-Dong missiles, dating back to the 1990’s, which Syria was converting for use as chemical warheads.

In a follow-up report, Alexandrovna added that Vice President Dick Cheney was suspected of being behind leaks to the press of misleading claims of a nuclear basis for the incident.

A third story in Alexandrovna’s series reported that the US and Israel were refusing to cooperate with an attempted investigation by the International Atomic Energy Agency, but that the IAEA had concluded on the basis of satellite imagery that the target was unlikely to have been nuclear.

However, the US/Israeli version continued to dominate most accounts of the incident. As recently as December, the Sunday Times was still insisting that “Israel’s top-secret air raid on Syria in September destroyed a bomb factory assembling warheads fuelled by North Korean plutonium.”

Now veteran investigative journalist Seymour Hersh has weighed in on the matter. Hersh appeared on CNN’s Late Edition on Sunday to discuss his upcoming article, “A Strike in the Dark,” which will appear in the Feb. 11 issue of the New Yorker.

Hersh writes in that article, “Whatever was under construction, with North Korean help, it apparently had little to do with agriculture — or with nuclear reactors — but much to do with Syria’s defense posture, and its military relationship with North Korea. And that, perhaps, was enough to silence the Syrian government after the September 6th bombing.”

“This is a wonderful sort of a complicated story,” Hersh told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. “Here Israel bombs another country, basically an act of war. … They don’t say anything publicly about it. The Israeli great ally, the United States, says nothing. Syria doesn’t say much about it. They complain, but they’re very muted too. … Nobody talks about it.”

Hersh went on to say that even though nobody was talking publicly, “there was tremendous sotto voce stuff. In other words, the Israeli government, the American government were leaking, telling newspaper people, particularly in America, but also in Europe, all sorts of wonderful, grandiose details about what happened.”

Hersh finally concluded as a result of his investigation that the claims that “when you began to look at each part… they sort of fall apart.” He is not even convinced the plant was a chemical warfare facility but believes it may have been a missile plant. “Israel may indeed have some evidence that’s overwhelming,” Hersh stated. “But without that sort of evidence, what they’ve done is, they’ve simply bombed another country.”

Hersh’s best guess as to the motivation of the bombing is that it was partly Israeli politics and partly “a message for the Iranians that we’re coming.”

[Note: I hardly think that’s likely. It was a demonstration of force intended to intimidate the Iranians but attacking a weapons warehouse in Syria is far less complicated and potentially dangerous than a direct attack on Iran. The Iranians know that and the Iranians know the isrealis know that as well. JV]